Friday, December 24, 2010

In this latest and most blasphemous War on Christmas my faith compels me to respond to those unbelievers who would deny even the existence of the One who is the true reason for the season: Santa Claus. These people must be cognitively defective, unable to see the visions of Santa we all experience daily, or to feel His spirit moving within them (or they deny it's there when they really, secretly, know it is, which would make them delusional). More likely in my opinion they want to deny Santa's system of rewards and punishments so they can do whatever they want and not be bound by any moral law. And that's a slippery slope. It is well known Hitler did not believe in Santa.

Santa Claus is defined by Scripture (that precious corpus of psalms and tales of His glory) and by natural reason as the Holly Trinity: He is One Being in three persons. He is the Santa Claus incarnate, the red-coated, bearded, fat-bellied jolly Man who becomes flesh every year to dispense His rewards and punishments on all (even the unbelieving--for even if you don't believe in Him, rest assured, He still believes in you). He is also the Christmas Spirit, which enters all our souls this time of year to communicate to us and move us to join in unison in celebrating the love of giving and cheer. And He is the Three Ghosts of Christmas, the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present, and the Ghost of Christmas Future.

Yes, at this point it gets complicated. Nonbelievers insist that that makes two more persons, so really Santa is five persons in one, and they mock us for our irrationality and inability to do basic math. But they are the ignorant ones. For clearly according to Scripture (Christmas Carol 9:21, 18:11, and 24:8) the three Ghosts are really temporally santificated incarnations of one and the same Ghost, and thus they, too, are three persons in One Being, and thus are One, and thus Santa is three persons in One, not five. Obviously.

This Santa Claus is the true reason for the season, and any shops or agencies that refuse to display His image or acknowledge He is the real Lord and God of this day should be shunned and condemned. Even refusing to use the proper name of the day, Christmas, mocks and insults all believers in Him, and such politically correct attempts to pretend this is just the "Happy Holidays" and not His day are wholly un-american. It is shocking that public schools are not allowed to teach that the name Christmas comes from the old Gaelic "Craughesd" which is the root of our modern English word "Claus," and that "mas" is a late corruption of the word "mush," which is the sacred word of command that Santa Claus calls out to His celestial deer creatures as He travels from chimney to chimney across the world on that Holy Night of that very blessed name: Christmas.

Shockingly, people deny even the existence of His minions, but the eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence is overwhelming: elves do exist, and so do the so-called "rain deer," so-named because they come from the "waters above heaven" (Genesis 1:6-8), from which also comes all rain. They are therefore in fact heavenly beings, and not the ugly tangle-horned nasty little things crassly called reindeer and herded for their disgusting milk in the hills of some pinko commie country.

But I am here to defend the existence of the One, Santa Claus. Perhaps there can be debate over the particulars of which minions serve Him. And we should strive to convince the unbeliever to at least enter our broad tent and begin that debate. But there is no possible way for any rational person to deny the existence of Santa Claus Himself. Santologians have long developed several iron-clad proofs of it, and I can only shake my head in perplexity at how unbelievers cannot have known of this. So I have gathered them all here, so the nonbeliever will be left with no excuse...

The Santalogical Argument

Santa Claus is by definition the greatest gift giver conceivable.

An actual gift giver is by definition greater than an imaginary gift giver.

If an actual gift giver is greater than an imaginary one, then the greatest gift giver must be an actual one and not imaginary.

But (per premise 1) no gift giver can be conceptually greater than Santa Claus.

Therefore, Santa Claus exists.

The Christmasological Argument

Either the universe had a beginning or has always existed.

Both science and logic entail the universe had a beginning.

Therefore the universe had a beginning.

Everything that has a beginning has a cause.

Therefore the universe had a cause.

Every cause must be either personal or mechanical.

But every mechanical cause is by definition a part of the universe, and therefore no mechanical cause can have preceded the universe to cause it.

Therefore the universe must have had a personal cause.

Santa Claus is a personal cause.

Creating the universe is the greatest gift conceivable.

The greatest gift conceivable can only have been given by the greatest gift giver conceivable.

Santa Claus is by definition the greatest gift giver conceivable.

Therefore, Santa Claus caused the universe to exist.

Therefore, Santa Claus exists.

The Fine Gifting Argument

The laws and constants of the universe are finely tuned to require the installation of vents, chimneys, and shafts in all households in which people live (due to the laws of thermodynamics and chemical respiration).

It is extraordinarily improbable that those laws and constants would be arranged in precisely the way that would require exactly what Santa Claus needs to enter our homes and deliver His gifts or coals.

It is very probable that if Santa Claus arranged the laws and constants of the universe that He would arrange them in exactly that way, which (lo and behold) is the way they actually are.

Therefore it is far more probable that Santa Claus arranged the laws and constants of the universe than that random chance did.

Therefore it is far more probable that Santa Claus exists.

Therefore Santa Claus exists.

Some have challenged premise 3 in the above argument, but their challenge has long been met by the following ancillary argument developed by the greatest and most flawless and beloved intellectual in human history, C.S. Lewis:

The greatest gift giver conceivable would by definition ensure he can deliver his gifts.

The delivery of gifts requires access into gift recipients' homes.

The ensuring of access into gift recipients' homes requires the arrangement of the laws and constants of physics so as to entail the installation of vents, chimneys, and shafts in all households in which people live.

Santa Claus is by definition the greatest gift giver conceivable.

Therefore, Santa Claus would have arranged the laws and constants of the universe exactly that way.

Argument from Christmas Spirit

Every Christmas season everyone the world over experiences the Christmas Spirit.

Santa Claus is by definition the Christmas Spirit.

Therefore every Christmas season everyone the world over experiences Santa Claus.

It is extraordinarily improbable that six billion people would simultaneously, the same time every year, hallucinate exactly the same experience.

Therefore Santa Claus is not a hallucination.

That which is experienced and is not a hallucination, is real.

Therefore, Santa Claus is real.

Therefore Santa Claus exists.

Argument from Christmas Miracles

Miraculous events have been documented to occur at and around Christmas (by multiple eyewitnesses and even mechanical recording devices that never lie, like TV cameras).

It is extraordinarily improbable that those miracles occur just by chance.

It is very probable that they would occur if Santa Claus caused them.

Therefore it is far more probable that Santa Claus caused them than that random chance did.

Therefore it is very probable that Santa Claus exists.

Therefore Santa Claus exists.

The greatest Christmas miracle of all, of course, is Santa Claus' miraculous transport of gifts and coals into billions of homes in a single night. Unbelievers insist this miracle doesn't happen because it is scientifically impossible. And yet millions of eyewitnesses and reliable documents confirm that it does indeed happen (NORAD even tracks Santa performing His miracle!). Yes, in some cases people posing as Santa Claus have been caught delivering gifts in His name, or even in disguise as Him, but just because some instances like that occur it does not follow that all instances are like that. You cannot judge a whole religion by a few bad apples.

Besides, claiming this goes against the laws of nature is simply bias against the supernatural. Not only have we proven that Santa Claus caused the laws of nature, so He can suspend them at will (and, besides, there is no way to prove He can't do that, so it is a fallacy to assume He can't, and therefore no argument from natural law against Santa Claus is valid anyway), but even apart from that, there are surely abilities and powers we haven't discovered yet.

Gaps in scientific knowledge entail we cannot claim such powers don't exist. Like the ability to suspend time or teleport. Santa Claus must have such powers, since He is, by definition, the greatest gift giver conceivable, and that entails having all the abilities necessary to fulfill that role. I really don't see the problem here. Why millions of deniers are ready to believe that stupid vanity trophies can teleport vile little child wizards into places where they irresponsibly get their friends killed by bald misshapen fascists with sticks, and yet won't believe Santa Claus can use a magic sleigh to teleport from place to place, is simply beyond me. The hypocrisy is palpable. Don't get me started on little witch girls taking gifts of timestopping watches from suspiciously bearded homosexuals. Suffice it to say, Santa Claus can have a timestopping watch if she can. And if He is, as He is, the greatest gift giver conceivable, if He must have a timestopping watch to fulfill that role, then it is logically necessary that He does have a timestopping watch. So there.

I'm sorry, I digress. It's just that deniers of my beloved One get me so angry. How can they be so stupid! It frightens me. Anyway, let me return to the final and most brilliant arguments for the existence of Santa Claus...

Argument from Christmas Qualia

Science has no explanation for the qualitative nature of human consciousness, in particular the visceral nature and quality of experiencing "joy" at the sight of a lit and decorated Christmas Tree.

Physics cannot even in principle explain this, since this quality of experience, "what it is like" to feel that joy and see that tree, are not physical things (the "treeness" and "joyness" do not have mass or location, they are not composed of atoms, and thus they cannot be reduced to physical things).

If science has not explained this and physics cannot explain it, then it must have some other explanation not of science or physics.

Santa Claus is an explanation not of science or physics.

Santa Claus is by definition the Christmas Spirit.

The Christmas Spirit must by definition be felt in order to exist.

Qualia are necessary to feel the Christmas Spirit.

Therefore if and only if qualia exist, the Christmas Spirit exists.

Qualia exist.

Therefore, the Christmas Spirit exists.

Therefore, Santa Claus exists.

Argument from Santa's Rocket

There are many other arguments proving Santa Claus exists. For example, it is necessary for us to be able to reason and for logic to be true, in order for us to enjoy the gifts of Christmas, and the only plausible explanation for how physical matter can reliably reason or for why logic could be true or be seen to be true by a physical brain, is if some One made that possible, and as that would by definition be the greatest gift imaginable, and Santa is the greatest gift giver imaginable, it follows that Santa made these things possible, and therefore exists. Likewise, we all acknowledge that moral laws exist, yet those laws must have a lawgiver, and as Santa Claus adjudicates those moral laws by the giving of gifts or coals, and as being governed by moral laws makes happiness possible and is therefore the greatest of all gifts, and Santa Claus is the greatest gift giver, it follows that moral laws come from Santa, and therefore Santa Claus exists. We can even prove Santa Claus originated life on earth (come on, it's just too frickin impossible otherwise!).

So there really can be no denying His existence anymore. But there is one final argument, which is the most definitive because it passed peer review even in an atheist philosophy journal, so even atheists had to admit it was sound and valid. In my very own article "Fatal Flaws in Michael Almeida's Alleged 'Defeat' of Rowe's New Evidential Argument from Evil" published in Philo (Volume 10, No. 1: Spring-Summer 2007, pp. 85-90), using the glorious premises of famed theologian Michael Almeida, I proved the following:

R1 = No rocket we know of allows Santa Claus to fly to any other planet.

R1 entails R1* = If Santa Claus exists, then if there is a rocket we know of, then that rocket does not allow Santa Claus to fly to any other planet.

If we have evidence against R1*, then it is more probably than not true that ~R1* = Santa Claus exists and there exists a rocket we know of and that rocket allows Santa Claus to fly to some other planet.

We know of rockets that would allow Santa Claus to fly to another planet.

Therefore we have evidence against R1*.

Therefore it is more probably than not true that ~R1*.

Therefore Santa Claus exists (and He even has a rocket that He flies to other planets!).

44 comments:

Being that we have satelites overhead that can map the entire North Pole to verify if Santa, his shoppe and his elves are up there or not, then why would a reasonable, thinking person equate God belief with the belief in Santa Claus?

Who are you Winston Smith? The only other person so obsessed is JP Holding who says something derogatory about me almost weekly. He has two blogs dedicated to personal attacks and another one where there is more, plus the screwball awards at Tweb. I suspect you might be him. Shame really. Get a life. Deal with the issues. Grow up.

This was one of the funniest things I have read in a long time. I think that the quantity of funniness (if that is a a word) that the reader will find in it, is directly proportional to the quantity of crazy justifications the reader has heard from supernaturalists.

Meanings, it's not really something worth passing along to my brother that has a great sense of humor, but does not follow supernaturalistic apologetics. But passing it along to my friend that has done public discussions with calvinist circus freak little jimmy white (because he was paid to do so, not because he had any interest in doing such things) will probably shoot soda out his nose as he reads it.

Unlike some people above (who seem to have their stockings stuffed up their assholes with care), I quite enjoy the way you've poked fun at both the holiday season and the OH SO SRS nature of christian apologetics today.

JD Curtis, if only you and the people operating those satellites would just open your hearts to Santa and believe in him, he would surely reveal himself. Clearly he has hidden his shop and elves from those with hardened hearts such as you. And surely a being as great as Santa would never rely on anything as cheap as evidence to make himself known. Open your heart! Christmas is fast approaching!

OF COURSE the reasoning is ignorant and involves a category mistake and "a stunning false analogy". That's because it's a parodic imitation of theism. It contains more stupidity than a sack full of hammers. That's the point.

I've always figured that just by the evidence Santa Claus is more likely than God. I mean presents from Santa, NORAD tracking, etc. It would take a conspiracy of epic proportions to fake that kind of evidence, and when ever something requires a world wide conspiracy rather than a simple easy to fathom answer it's usually pretty straight forward.

I must agree with some of these other people. It's an absurd analogy of God -> Santa Claus; there's so much more evidence for Santa.

These arguments are good, but I was brought to Santa by the Principle of Embarassment applied to Santa's physical dimensions. Who would ever consider inventing a man (if it be lawful to call him a man) who gets transported by a flying sleigh and climbs down chimneys but is obese? You just wouldn't do it. It must be true!

This is quite thorough. For a moment I thought that you had forgotten about SAC (The Santandental Argument for the existence of Claus), but it appears that bits of that argument appear in your other arguments.

However, a real santalogian would have included a modern version of the SAC argument (tsk, tsk). I'm just saying!

JD Curtis said...Being that we have satelites overhead that can map the entire North Pole to verify if Santa, his shoppe and his elves are up there or not, then why would a reasonable, thinking person equate God belief with the belief in Santa Claus?

Come now. Famed Santologist Origen said Santa and his minions and facilities can only be seen by the eye of faith (Contra Celsum 2.64-67), so space cameras won't see them. Just like vampires.

But the real folly in your claim is assuming the Scriptures are to be taken literally, when in fact they are intended metaphorically. Just as Santa's "rain deer" are really celestial creatures, from above the vault of heaven, whenever reference is made to the "frigid" North Pole what is really meant is the freezing vacuum of the Galactic North Pole, way up in outer space, beyond the view of even the Hubble Telescope (which still couldn't see them anyway because of that eye of faith thing).

Brian said...I was brought to Santa by the Principle of Embarassment applied to Santa's physical dimensions. Who would ever consider inventing a man (if it be lawful to call him a man) who gets transported by a flying sleigh and climbs down chimneys but is obese? You just wouldn't do it. It must be true!

Oh, that's brilliant! You must have gotten that one from C.S. Lewis! I'll have to read his famous works again. So much treasure in there!

The Science Pundit said...For a moment I thought that you had forgotten about SAC (The Santandental Argument for the existence of Claus), but it appears that bits of that argument appear in your other arguments. However, a real santalogian would have included a modern version of the SAC argument (tsk, tsk). I'm just saying!

Only those stinking heretical Clausicalvinists would ever use such a retarded argument. Oh why won't Santa finally come and kill them! I'll pray for it. I truly believe that will happen in my lifetime!

The hate of calvinists is somewhat of a legendary stature. It's both Self, and hate for others, which also makes sense. If you hate yourself that much, you obviously cannot have anything but hate for others.

Philosophizing is all well and good but all of man's wisdom is nothing compared to the experience of Santa Claus and having a personal relationship with him.

I know we both believe the truth, but put away your logic and fancy arguments and just let him enter your hearth.

You probably know it, but there is a meme going around these days about the so-called Santa myth. These Santa mythers are saying that Santa Claus just doesn't exist - which is so fringe that even a TV producer would blush.

They are misrepresenting other legends and saying that Santa Claus is just based on a 'St. Nicholas' who apparently came before him. Of course historians agree that St. Nicholas is merely a legend - though based on an actual man - and the legend was invented retrospectively by those who had everything to lose by admitting that Santa is the one, true gift-giver.

There are also deniers who say that because there are differing eyewitness accounts of Santa Claus, the whole thing must be false. But of course if you look at the same news story in Time and Newsweek, you won't deny the story just because of a few mistakes by imperfect journalists.

And in fact the differences are signs of authenticity of the Claus story. It's what you'd expect from human experience - heck, some eyewitnesses, zealous of what they know is true, simply copied verbatim some of the accounts that others made. This certainly is worthy of reproof. But it has nothing to do with the truth value of the statements themselves.

And the fact that some of these accounts have been repeated is evidence that they go back a long, long way. Nobody would repeat what they know is unsubstantiated. On the contrary: ancient societies were very careful to pass on wisdom and stories from generation to generation.

And a final word to those hostile to us: some of we Santaclausians may stumble from time to time - we may even be bad people on occasion. But you can't judge the truth of a claim based on the behaviour of those who believe it. We do not claim to be always good - we simply claim that Santa Claus is always good.

a. Does Santa advocate altruism? The Words say, "He knows if you've been bad or good" (a veiled threat that how you behave will determine whether or not you'll get what you want on Dec. 24th), "so be good for goodness' sake" (isn't this superfluous after the previous line? They're already terrified they won't get what they want if they misbehave)b. Claus and effect- omnipresent or just REALLY fast?c. Clausian decadence. Why is Santa obese? Should one eat as much as they want if they can do it without dying? d. Should Santa be able to whip his reindeer, and if so, should he whip his elves too?e. Is Santa a communist?f. Did/does Mrs. Asherah Claus really exist?g. Are Santa’s children really training for godhood on an ice planet called Snolob?

The fact that Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer was willing to endure such persecution from the other eight flying reindeer on account of his glowing nose is strong evidence that his nose did indeed glow.

WARNING! I spoke with Robert M. Priceless and he said much of Richard's defense of Claus is an obvious interpolation by over-zealous Clausians who have hijacked him and hacked his blog. He says The Santa Project is currently working on a color-coded version of his post until the real Richard is found.

Pikeman and othersYes, some fringe writers on the internet have claimed that Santa is a myth based on a syncretism of early Christian gifting characters. They cite some superficial parallels between Santa and the mythical Saints of the early Christian churches: Basil and Nicholas.

No reputable scholar has ever accepted such a view.

To dispose of such ludicrous gibberish it is sufficient to simply point out that neither of these figures ever kept reindeer nor had little white pom-poms on the ends of their hats.

The Journal of the Institute of Scientific Santa Clausism is the print organ of the Institute of Scientific Santa Clausism, a research facility dedicated to gathering scientific evidence confirming the existence of Santa Claus and collecting information concerning the details of Santa's nature. It is our goal to place before the scientific community and the lay public a body of evidence so vast and solid as to convince all skeptics and silence the Secular Grinchists and other Santa- Claustrophobics. Being objective, we acknowledge that it may be true that some of the millions of annual Santa-clausal sightings may not bear up to careful scrutiny, being cases of mistaken identity, lies by misguided publicity seekers, and perhaps even (as the skeptics claim) products of hallucinations or swamp gas. None the less, as any rational open-minded individual must admit, if even one percent (a conservative figure) of the reported sightings and other evidence of Santa Claus cannot be explained away by the Secular Anti-SantaClausalists, this still results in an overwhelming volume of positive data.

Since this Journal's inception, the Institute of Scientific Santa Clausism in conjunction with dozens of professional and lay Chris- Kringlists across the globe has presented to the world such momentous discoveries as the actual burial shroud of Santa Claus, actual phonograph recordings of Santa's voice, numerous actual photographs of Mr. Claus himself, incontrovertible evidence of Santa Claus in the hieroglyphic books of the ancient Maya, together with various well documented eye-witness reports and revelations of previously little-known details concerning Chris-Kringual nature.

It's funny how this thread has taken on a life of it's own. I enjoyed the original story, but seeing how many really witty and well though out additions there have been has been almost equally as entertaining. It's nice to see such good clean fun.

Perhaps not. Reports are trickling into The Santa Project suggesting a possible conversion to Clausianism by Dr. Carrier. There is robust debate among scholars regarding rumors that Dr. Carrier witnessed, first-hand, Santa Clause feeding a multitude of unbelievers with a single loaf of stale fruitcake and a single cup of sour eggnog. However, Dr. Priceless remains skeptical, saying that - if true - it is a clear indication that Dr. Carrier is suffering from Stockholm syndrome since his abduction.

UPDATE: Someone reminded me that Dr. Priceless is associated with The Santa Seminar and not The Santa Project. I stand corrected, I must have been thinking of the Sam Harrass organization which was recently changed to Project Santa, or was it the other way around?

I'm Santa. I just woke up from my Sabbath. My elves & I were quite busy before the 24th & my omnipresence all across 24 time zones each year has me growing more white hair & beard. Martin Scorcese has the true story of my life ready to film, but there seems to be a problem with Barbara Hershey agreeing to be filmed nude during my Last Temptation of me scene. We can't figure if it's the tattoo's, the frigid temperature or some contract detail not in continuity with William Dafoe's approval. People just don't get it, Jeebus, Pinnochio and I are all real. Ye of so little faith. But in Thessalonians, be mindful Jehovah: "shall cause them to believe strong delusions..." I really do like the colorized version of 34th ST. Jimmy Hoffa tells me Stallone is real, Jack Nicholson is not. My elves & rein deer all get union wages & no animals are harmed in the production of any Santa films. As long as Gore Vidal is alive, Ben Hur will remain a fine gay testament. Something about Lonely Bones? Watch out you evil doers. An icicle will drop down your bad neck & ye shall fall off thy cliff. Burl Ives is my best singer, but John Lennon was the most truthful. And to all a good night. Remember Sarah wants you to donate to the ASPCA if you can't adopt an animal in need. Peace is already created in your memories intact for those who believe. Hell is the weapons haunted world you all must repent of.... Santa 843-926-1750 Dial A Santaist....post script to Rational gaze: Everyone knows that men my age have erectile dysfunction. Viagra will make you go blind. I can see perfectly. All are safe on my lap with nary a woody of lust.

AIGBusted You present a compelling arguement - well worth pasting your URL into my browser. I look forward to the YouTube debate with Dr. Carrier in his smug and blissful Stockholm stupor. "Santa Converts" are almost as disgusting as reformed smokers!